Chain of Evidence. Storage. Each step in the collecting and processing of the urine specimens shall be documented to establish procedural integrity and the chain of custody. Where a positive result is confirmed, urine specimens shall be maintained in a secured, refrigerated storage area. If a dispute arises, the specimens will be stored until all legal disputes are settled.
Chain of Evidence. The procedures to obtain, handle, and store test samples and to conduct laboratory tests shall be documented to establish procedural integrity and chain of evidence. Such procedures shall be administered with due regard for the employee’s privacy and the need to maintain the confidentiality of test results and to an extent which is not inconsistent with the needs of this policy.
Chain of Evidence. The procedures to obtain, handle, and store blood and 26 urine samples and to conduct laboratory tests shall be documented to establish 27 procedural integrity and chain of evidence as established by the reference laboratory 28 used by the Hospital for such testing. All tests and results will be identified in such a 29 way as to ensure employee confidentiality.
Chain of Evidence. The procedures to obtain, handle, and store test 27 samples and to conduct laboratory tests shall be documented to 28 establish procedural integrity and chain of evidence. Such procedures 29 shall be administered with due regard for the employee’s privacy and 30 the need to maintain the confidentiality of test results and to an extent 31 which is not inconsistent with the needs of this policy.
Chain of Evidence. The procedures to obtain, handle, and store blood and 5 urine samples and to conduct laboratory tests shall be documented to 6 establish procedural integrity and chain of evidence as established by the reference laboratory used by the Hospital for such testing. All tests and results will be identified in such a way as to ensure employee 8 confidentiality.
Chain of Evidence. In order to be used in rule of law criminal proceedings, the linking of circumstantial evidence and the conclusions drawn from it must be logical, consistent and compelling. Therefore, convictions and the establishment of a suspicion presuppose that the facts on which they are based have a certain quality and that it can be concluded with a certain probability from the facts that the suspect/accused is indeed the offender. The necessary quality of the facts and the necessary probability of committing the offence increase with the intensity of the investigation measures applied on the basis of the suspicion (e.g. search and seizure, detention on remand). For a conviction, the factual basis must be of the highest quality and the probability of perpetration must be highest. The degree of suspicion required for investigative measures and the standard of the court’s persuasion for a conviction vary widely between the different national criminal procedural systems. What the systems have in common, however, is that the various stages of suspicion are described with normative terms. The descriptions of the suspicion reflect a certain necessary quality of the facts and a necessary level of probability of the offence being committed that can be derived from the facts. Examples (from the German and US Codes of Criminal Procedure) include the "simple" suspicion to start an investigation, the reasonable suspicion for special investigation measures (e.g. seizure), sufficient suspicion to bring charges against the suspect, probable cause for arrests and warrants, and, last but not least, the "beyond all reasonable doubts" standard to convict the suspect. It is difficult to harmonize the normative standard of evidence in criminal proceedings with statistical results of data analysis procedures. The criminal lawyers involved in the proceedings must be enabled to subsume the results of technical investigations under the normative concepts. Therefore, the relevant information must be presented to the criminal lawyers in a form and language that they can understand. When using data analysis techniques such as address clustering, both the software tools used, and the investigating IT experts must therefore be able to provide exact information about which evidence is to be derived from the analysis and what conclusions can be drawn from it with what probability. In addition, possible sources of error must be identified, and alternative hypotheses must be presented and, if neces...
Chain of Evidence. Sources Related to State Level Education Reform Figure 2: Chain of Evidence: Sources Related to Local Level School Reform Table 1 provides an overview of the relationship of all data sources to the research questions. Table 1
